Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

 Why the photographic fakery of Mary Mooman in the Z film?

Her image doesn't change. Here she is at 293, and it looks perfect for her to snap the shutter and be done.

But no; in 299, she's still at it. The Kennedy's have moved such that Jackie is now blocking her view of JFK. 

I don't see how she's going to capture JFK now, when Jackie is blocking her view of him.  Mary looks about the same except for her coat being open, exposing her white pants. But, I have to wonder if it's real or if they just blackened it out in 293. 

But after that, it never changes. She looks the same, and she points the camera in the same direction. Here she is in 310. 

The last frame of her is 314, which is the same.

The official story has it that she didn't take her picture until 316, in which you can't even see her.

So, do you think Mary waited for hours in the warm sun only to have the Kennedys slowly approach her, but she waited until they passed her, and then shot the back of their heads? You buying that, are you? 

Well, since I don't think she was insane, I think she took her photo at 293, or even earlier. But, they copied her image and placed it in subsequent frames to sell the idea that she didn't take her picture until 316.  Why? Because the Moorman photo corresponds to 316. So, what gives? What gives is that that isn't her photo. They destroyed her photo and replaced it with the one that we have, which was taken by Babushka Lady. Why did they do that? It was because Mary's photo must have shown something that was just too damaging to the official story.  

And what about the accidental white thumbprint? It was no accident. It was deliberate. It was put there to cover up BJ Martin. You see, the Moorman photo was taken at a diagonal angle from behind. Like this:

That's the photographer who took it: Babushka Lady. And that's the reason why the Kennedys aren't centered in the picture.

So, the thumbprint covered up Martin. This is how it looked before.

Somebody used Photoshop to try to remove the thumbprint, and this is what they got. His head is missing, but you can see much of his body.

Look at the depth of the front wheel of the bike. Then look at the depth of Hargis in the white helmit. He is deeper in the picture than the front wheel is. That's because it's not his front wheel. It's BJ Martin's front wheel.

I don't claim to know this, but I suspect that when the FBI brought Mary the photo with the thumbprint that they also brought a check. After all, they damaged her very valuable historical photo. Why shouldn't they have to pay damages? And I suspect they were nice about it. They offered to pay. "No lawsuit needed; but let's keep this confidential."  

I admit that this is all conjecture. I have no proof or evidence. But, I do have a similar case: Marina Oswald. They needed her to tell certain things to the Warren Commission about Oswald. And during the time of her "protective custody," a lot of money came her way. Money from caring Americans, money for Oswald's Historical Diary, money to let Priscilla Johnson write a book about her, a huge amount for the film rights to her life story from an Italian company, and they never even made the film. One of the first things she did was hire a business agent.   

But, the big question is: what was in the photo that Mary actually took that was so damaging? Well, I guarantee you it wasn't some shooter, such as Badgeman. They kept borrowing and returning her photo, and if it was just that, they could easily have fixed it. No, it was JFK. She said she was only 15 feet away from him. It had to be him- what it showed of him in the limo. 

Here is Mary talking about it shortly afterwards, though not the same day. You'll hear her say that she was in the street when she took the photo.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0hh_9pHNSE 

Look where she is. She is in the street. And look where she's facing. She's facing up the street. She had them in her viewfinder long before they reached her. 

She said she "followed them for so many seconds, and then took the picture." But, did she actually wait for this? 

From where she started, she would have had to turn 135 degrees to take that photo. That would have been insane.  

So, what did her camera see when she pressed the shutter? Well, she has always said that she took her photo at the same time as the first shot, and it was followed by 2 or 3 more shots. So, how could she have taken the Moorman photo, which was taken after the last shot? 

However, I doubt she heard the sound of the first shot. It was taken high on the hill from the Dal-Tex building, when Kennedy was barely out of the intersection, and it put the poison ice flechette into him.  She was too far away from that. So, what she thought was the first shot was probably the second shot. So, maybe she caught Kennedy right before he was hit in the throat. Maybe she caught a picture of him reacting to the first shot, which showed that he was in distress, great distress, even though officially, he wasn't supposed to be hit yet. 

Now can you understand why they had to get rid of her photo?

It is iron-clad that the feds kept borrowing her photo, again and again and again, even though they made perfect copies on November 22. So, since they had the copies, why did they keep needing her original? It had to be because that's the one that had to be altered. 

And ultimately, they made the decision to replace it. 

Now, if you think that is too fantastical to be true, then you tell me why Mary would let the Kennedys slowly approach her, and then let them pass her, only to shoot the backs of their heads. If you've got a good explanation for that, I'd like to hear it.